Connect with us

Connecticut

CT no-fault evictions ban expansion dies in legislature

Published

on

CT no-fault evictions ban expansion dies in legislature


Proposed reform to state eviction laws — which would have required landlords to provide a reason for evicting someone, a concept known as “just cause” — will not move forward this year, proponents said Tuesday.

As the legislature’s 2025 session approaches its final weeks, Housing Committee Co-Chair, Rep. Antonio Felipe, D-Bridgeport, said he doesn’t expect House Bill 6889 to come up for a vote in the House. The bill, which had broad support from Connecticut renters and housing advocates, passed the Housing Committee in March.

Although lawmakers who endorsed eviction reform said many of their colleagues privately supported it, not enough of them were willing to go public with that support by voting in favor of the bill.

“I don’t think there is any path forward at this point,” Felipe said Tuesday morning. “I believe we have the votes. I don’t believe those votes are all willing to be public at this point.”

Advertisement

Last year, Felipe faced problems in the House with a similar bill that would have reformed evictions in Connecticut. Although Senate leadership believed they had the votes, the House wasn’t able to secure enough support.

Felipe championed the just cause eviction bill again this session. The bill would have banned no-fault evictions, which typically occur at the end of a lease, in buildings with five or more units, after the tenant had been there for at least a year. Connecticut has similar protections in place for renters with disabilities and seniors.

Tenants say this type of eviction may be used in retaliation when renters complain about housing conditions or to evict every resident of a building or complex when new ownership purchases the property.

Negotiations over the bill have been going back and forth for weeks. Members of the Democratic party were split, even in the committee process.

H.B. 6889 drew some of the most heated debate and the largest number of speakers of any bill the Housing Committee considered this session.

Advertisement

Landlords opposed the bill, saying it would make it harder for them to evict problem tenants.

“There is no more cause for the ‘just cause’ bill today than there was when the legislature rejected it last year, because it does not protect Connecticut’s apartment communities and will not build one new apartment home to relieve the state’s housing shortage,” the Connecticut Apartment Association said in an April press release about the bill.

Ultimately, the bill faced a similar fate this year.

Luke Melonakos-Harrison, vice president of the Connecticut Tenants Union, said Tuesday that the news of its demise was disheartening, particularly considering the hundreds of renters who testified and the broad support it drew from advocacy groups focused on housing, homelessness, health and labor unions.

“I don’t understand what these Democrats are so afraid of,” Melonakos-Harrison said, adding that about a third of Connecticut residents are tenants compared to a much smaller number of landlords.

Advertisement

“It’s such a massive constituency that I struggle to understand why legislators, so many of them, seem to recognize landlords as a constituency with shared concerns, but don’t seem to recognize tenants as a constituency,” Melonakos-Harrison said.

The statewide Connecticut Tenants Union has gaining political power for the past few years, formalizing its structure and increasing lobbying activities. But lobbying groups representing landlords maintain a more established presence in the state Capitol.

While the bill was under consideration, some Connecticut residents received phone calls asking them to oppose the measure. “Imagine living next to someone who makes you feel unsafe, and there is nothing you can do about it. Can we count on you to oppose this bill?” one caller said.

House leadership earlier this month said support had been difficult to gather within the party caucus. Speaker of the House Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, said he’d fielded concerns from lawmakers who feared that if new owners couldn’t evict renters, they wouldn’t be able to make renovations and rental housing would deteriorate.

Members of the Democratic caucus also raised concerns that it would be hard for landlords to evict “bad tenants,” Ritter said. Landlords have repeatedly raised the same issue — that if someone is smoking or being disruptive, it’s sometimes easier to evict them through a no-fault eviction. 

Advertisement

“You have people saying, ‘If you don’t incentivize people to come in, and then they can’t charge higher rents, they’re going to let their buildings be decrepit, deteriorate, and then flip it,” Ritter said. “And we could not solve that in the caucus. That was probably the single biggest issue.”

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford, said it’s a tough balance to strike between tenants’ rights and landlord issues.

Republican lawmakers broadly opposed the bill.

“I had serious concerns with this same proposal last year, which would have established a general right for any tenant to remain in a rental unit after a lease term expires in perpetuity. It didn’t even come up for a vote in the House because it’s a problematic concept,” said Housing Committee ranking member Rep. Tony Scott, R-Monroe, in a text message after the launch of the just cause campaign.

Sen. Rob Sampson of Wolcott, ranking member of the Housing Committee, has said the bill would violate landlords’ rights and that government shouldn’t encroach on private contracts like leases.

Advertisement

It wasn’t clear whether Gov. Ned Lamont supported the bill. At a recent press briefing, he gave what he admitted was a neutral response when questioned about his stance.

“Look, rents are going up a lot,” Lamont said. “There’s a lot of sudden shock. A lot of people are at risk of losing a place to stay. So I understand the worry about that. You also want to get a balance and make sure we have people continuing to invest in a state like this with rental units.”



Source link

Advertisement

Connecticut

Lawmakers again push to restore Shore Line East service to 2019 levels

Published

on

Lawmakers again push to restore Shore Line East service to 2019 levels


Connecticut lawmakers are again looking to restore Shore Line East rail service to its pre‑pandemic levels, a proposal that could add about 90 more trains per week.

Lawmakers are also weighing a separate cost‑saving proposal to shift the line from electric rail cars back to diesel.

The plan comes as ridership remains well below 2019 numbers, though state data shows those numbers have begun to climb.

The Department of Transportation provided the General Assembly’s transportation committee with the following data:

Advertisement
  • 132 trains per week today versus 222 trains per week in 2019, according to the CTDOT commissioner.
  • In 2019, most weekday SLE trains traveled between New Haven Union Station and Old Saybrook. This allowed SLE to operate with only five train sets in the morning and four train sets in the afternoon.
  • It should be noted that 2019 SLE service levels were very different due to constrained infrastructure; 2019 service levels had a reduced number of SLE trains serving New London (13 trains per day Monday through Friday, as opposed to 20 today), while other stations had increased service (36 trains per day Monday through Friday, as opposed to 20 today).

“2019 levels beyond Old Saybrook to New London would require more crews and more train sets than were used in 2019, requiring significantly more financial resources,” the department wrote in its written testimony.

The department said the governor’s FY2027 budget does not include funding for a full restoration. In other words, even if the legislature requires additional trains, the funds are not included in the current financial plan.

Governor Lamont said on Monday to remember that the state subsidizes the line more than any other rail right now.

“There’s not as much demand as there are for some of the other rail services in other parts of the state, so that’s the balance we’re trying to get right,” Lamont said.

At a public hearing on Monday, concerns about the line’s reliability and schedule were a central focus in the testimony.

“We’re making the line less attractive, some would say. The schedules are very, very difficult to manage,” said Sen. Christine Cohen of Guilford, the co-chair of the committee.

Advertisement

The current schedule for eastbound morning commuters is difficult. The train either arrives in New London just after 7 a.m. or after 9 a.m.

“So obviously not really … conducive to a typical workday,” Cohen said.

Cohen, who represents communities along the line, said she continues to reintroduce the bill to expand service year after year, pushing the state to do more with the line.

She thanked the department for the work it was able to do with the recent funding to establish a through train to Stamford.

“What do we need to do, and what are the challenges that you face in terms of expansion at this time?” Cohen asked.

Advertisement

Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto responded that the biggest hurdle is the cost of labor and access fees to Amtrak, which owns the territory.

“The cost to provide rail service is very expensive,” Eucalitto said.

He said CTDOT knows the current schedule is “not ideal,” but the economics of a work-from-home society are difficult.

“People expect 100% of the trains that they had in 2019, but they only want to take it two days a week,” Eucalitto said.

Asked about the eastbound schedule, the commissioner explained Shore Line East still operates on a model that sends trains toward New Haven in the morning rather than toward New London.

Advertisement

Changing that would require more equipment, more crews, and a second morning operations base, as well as negotiations with Amtrak, which owns the tracks.

Amtrak is “protecting their slots to be able to run increased Northeast Regional service as well as increased Acela service,” Eucallito said. “They’re going to look at us and question, ‘Well, how does that impact our need for Amtrak services?’ They’ll never give you an answer upfront, it’s always: ‘show us a proposal and then they’ll respond to it.’”

Cohen, who chairs the Transportation Committee, touted how a successful Shoreline East benefits the environment, development along the line, and reduces I-95 congestion.

“We need to start talking about how much money this costs us and think about all of the ancillary benefits,” Cohen said during the hearing.

Cohen said there is multi-state support for extending the line into Rhode Island.

Advertisement

“We will need some federal dollars. But as you say, there are other businesses up the line in New London,” Cohen said. “We’ve got Electric Boat. We’ve got Pfizer up that way. If we can get those employees on the transit line, we’re all the better for it.”

Rider advocates said the issue is familiar.

“I’d rather see solutions, and not things that are holding it back,” said Susan Feaster, founder of the Shore Line East Riders’ Advocacy Group.

She said she worries the line is facing a transit death spiral, with reduced service leading to lower ridership and falling fare revenue.

“They have to give us the money,” Feaster said. “It shouldn’t have to be profitable.”

Advertisement

Like other train lines across the country, Shore Line East relies on subsidies.

“We’re not asking for everything to be done overnight, but just incrementally,” Feaster said.

The line received $5 million two years ago, which increased service levels.

The proposal comes as the state reviews whether to return to diesel rail cars that are more than 30 years old.

The state says the switch would save about $9 million, but riders have said it would worsen the passenger experience.

Advertisement

NBC Connecticut asked Cohen whether she’ll ask DOT to reverse that proposal.

“I really want to,” Cohen said. “I appreciate what CTDOT was trying to do in terms of not cutting service as a result of trying to find savings elsewhere. This isn’t the way to do it.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Connecticut

Iranian Yale scholar in Connecticut celebrates fall of regime, calls for free elections

Published

on

Iranian Yale scholar in Connecticut celebrates fall of regime, calls for free elections


HARTFORD, Conn. (WFSB) – Thousands of Connecticut families with ties to Iran are watching and waiting as their home country undergoes a historic change.

Among them is Ramin Ahmadi, a Yale doctor, human rights activist and founder of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. He has spent decades advocating for freedom in Iran from his home in Connecticut.

Ahmadi moved to the United States when he was 18. On Saturday morning, he learned of military strikes in Iran and the death of the country’s supreme leader.

Ahmadi said protests for democracy and human rights in Iran intensified in December, drawing millions of participants — including his own family and friends.

Advertisement

“The situation in Iran was a humanitarian emergency and it needed an intervention,” Ahmadi said.

He said he celebrated when he heard the news Saturday morning.

“I was celebrating along with all other Iranians inside and outside the country,” Ahmadi said. “I do regret that we cannot bring him to a trial for crimes that he has committed against humanity.”

Ahmadi said he spoke with his sister in Iran after she celebrated in the streets. She was later told to return home for her safety.

He shared a message she relayed from those around her.

Advertisement

“They said do not let our death be exploited because worse than that is having to live with the criminals who have done this to us for the rest of our lives,” Ahmadi said. “We do not want to do that.”

For those questioning whether the conflict was America’s to engage in, Ahmadi offered a direct response.

“We will all be affected,” he said. “And to those that tell you that the U.S. and Israel are beating the drums of war in Iran, one has to remind them that it was not like before this Iranian people were listening to Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 in D minor. We had a war already declared on us by this regime. We were being slaughtered on a daily basis.”

Ahmadi said he believes the path forward begins with young military officers forcing out what remains of the regime, followed by free elections.

“Everyone’s life will be safer in the future and not just Iranians,” Ahmadi said.

Advertisement

Connecticut lawmakers are also responding to the U.S. strikes on Iran.



Source link

Continue Reading

Connecticut

Two people shot in New Haven restaurant Saturday evening

Published

on

Two people shot in New Haven restaurant Saturday evening


New Haven police say two people were shot at a restaurant on Grand Avenue Saturday evening.

One of the victims was a 22-year-old male from East Haven who was shot in the leg and was transported to Yale New Haven Hospital for treatment.

According to police, the second victim was a 17-year-old male and arrived shortly after.

While on scene, police confirmed one of the possible shooters was still inside the restaurant.

Advertisement

According to police, the victims were both inside the restaurant when the teen was approached by Naguea Bratton and another suspect.

They say a fight occurred which resulted in both victims being shot.

Police detained Bratton who was charged with carrying a pistol without a permit, two counts of illegal possession of a high-capacity magazine and larceny of a motor vehicle.

Bratton is being held on a $200,000 bond.

Both victims have non-life-threatening injuries police say.

Advertisement

They say additional arrests are expected to be completed by warrant.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending